2 ms·

Should speech targeting violence and discrimination against a minority or "protected" group be allowed on a private platform? It is certainly offending people t

Should speech targeting violence and discrimination against a minority or "protected" group be allowed on a private platform? It is certainly offending people to call for their extermination.

rootw0rm 3y ago
personally i think yes. any opportunity to call out people publicly for disgusting behaviour presents a chance for people to learn. i think it's okay for people to be reminded that ugly ideas like fascism exist and are still current. specifically on 'private platform' detail...it's a rather slippery slope to force people to host or not host particular ideas on their own property. it's easy to pick a couple topics that most people would agree are 'bad' and shouldn't be discussed, but where does it end? i'm more in favor of publicly calling Nazis assholes wherever they show up.
kubectl_h 3y ago
Depends on whether that "private platform" is more or less a commons. One of the most insidious phrases we have in our hyper-online society is that the "internet is not real life". Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc have profound effects on society and the notion that they are "private platforms" that have no responsibility to uphold our broad collective values is perverse.
- stjohnswarts 3y ago
  That's the kind of thinking that leads to “wrongthink” and precisely why we have the bill of rights. If you don't like what is on a platform, then you need to start your own and provide a safe space there. Short of advocating specific violence/treason/threats, you can generally say what you want in America. That's why section 230 is so valuable so that every newly elected party can't just start throwing Facebook employees in jail because they don't like what is being said there. If you don't like Facebook, don't use it; if you don't like twitter: don't use it; if you don't like gab: don't use it.

2 ms·

Should speech targeting violence and discrimination against a minority or "protected" group be allowed on a private platform? It is certainly offending people t

by wesleywt 3y ago

Should speech targeting violence and discrimination against a minority or "protected" group be allowed on a private platform? It is certainly offending people to call for their extermination.

rootw0rm 3y ago
personally i think yes. any opportunity to call out people publicly for disgusting behaviour presents a chance for people to learn. i think it's okay for people to be reminded that ugly ideas like fascism exist and are still current. specifically on 'private platform' detail...it's a rather slippery slope to force people to host or not host particular ideas on their own property. it's easy to pick a couple topics that most people would agree are 'bad' and shouldn't be discussed, but where does it end? i'm more in favor of publicly calling Nazis assholes wherever they show up.
kubectl_h 3y ago
Depends on whether that "private platform" is more or less a commons. One of the most insidious phrases we have in our hyper-online society is that the "internet is not real life". Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc have profound effects on society and the notion that they are "private platforms" that have no responsibility to uphold our broad collective values is perverse.
- stjohnswarts 3y ago
  That's the kind of thinking that leads to “wrongthink” and precisely why we have the bill of rights. If you don't like what is on a platform, then you need to start your own and provide a safe space there. Short of advocating specific violence/treason/threats, you can generally say what you want in America. That's why section 230 is so valuable so that every newly elected party can't just start throwing Facebook employees in jail because they don't like what is being said there. If you don't like Facebook, don't use it; if you don't like twitter: don't use it; if you don't like gab: don't use it.